D&D General why do we have halflings and gnomes?

[FrozenNorth]

I legit think they do. They have solid hooks, solid write-ups, tons of interesting reinterpretations. I legitimately think that no one has had a single bad thing to say about them except for short jokes.

In post 530 in this thread (I don’t know how to cite it), I go through the 13 classes and compare with the gnome and halfling descriptions. I was pleasantly surprised at how many classes are good fits for gnomes based on the racial description.

 

[tetrasodium]

In post 530 in this thread (I don’t know how to cite it), I go through the 13 classes and compare with the gnome and halfling descriptions. I was pleasantly surprised at how many classes are good fits for gnomes based on the racial description.

Right click or hold the number in the top right corner of a post and click/tap copy link copy url or whatever your browser says for it like this 530. To link it highlight some text and use the chain link button or type of out like this

  [url="https://www.enworld.org/threads/why-do-we-have-halflings-and-gnomes.677747/post-8180482"]530[/url]

 

[Chaosmancer]

I never called you a troll and use of "Strawking" was pointing out a strawman for the umpteenth time.

Really? Because this:

No. I'm saying that the roads are from human town to human town and the halfling villages are in out of the way places with paths that are hard to find(per halfling lore). A horde of undead sent by a Necromancer who isn't brain dead, isn't going to go wandering the countryside in the hopes of wandering across a halfling village. They are going to go down the roads which are guaranteed to hit towns and cities for them to destroy.

The trolls are arguing otherwise.

Says otherwise.

Of course, let me guess. Despite that being something I am arguing against you on, since you didn't say my name, it doesn't count as you calling me a troll. Because you only call me a troll if you use my name, not position an argument that I am specifically having with you as something between yourself and trolls (Note plural as well)

You aren't fooling anyone, especially since:

This is false. I call you out for significant changes to what I say. I use my words carefully and your constant twisting of what I say into absolutes changes the meaning by quite a bit.

So, there you go. You are very careful with your words, which is why I know you meant to call me a troll, by saying that trolls were arguing with you about the necromancer's undead horde.

 

[Maxperson]

Really? Because this:




Says otherwise.

That was a typo. There is only one troll in this thread and it isn't you. I'm sorry if you got the wrong impression from my mistake.

 

[Nellisir]

Some of this is also simply the concentrated halfling luck supernatural effect. I don't see why it's so difficult to accept in a world with flying reptiles that breath fire.

Dunno. The obsession with evolution always amused me. The campaign setting has real gods. Why is it so hard to believe that cocktrices are actually the result of some god being irked at a farmer? Or chickens laying eggs in a bad magic patch? Or curses? Or all of the above? Half-giants (jotunkin) in my campaign occur when people live near giants. Elves can (with some time) shift from being high elves to wood elves, depending on where they choose to hang their hat.

 

[Nellisir]

Yea, it doesn't take much for something to be qualified as a "road" vrs a path. Travel it enough & you will wear it to something worth qualifying for " turn at the big rock & follow the road"

A road is a lane and a lane is a track and a track is a path and a path is a trail, we can figure it's 2' wide and will accommodate wagons. Good catch!

Spoiler: mm316

View attachment 132805

Spoiler: mm44

View attachment 132806

What undead are you thinking of with 1hp?

I'm thinking that someone is too invested in this discussion. There are different styles and methods of playing D&D. I don't use average hit points...on average. And any D&D up through at least 3e. In 5e the road probably does 1d6 damage and requires a dexterity save to avoid the rope. You can sort that out if you're worried about it. Cheers!

 

[Feyfiendmonsterer]

Brave words. Wrong ones, but brave ones.

plus honestly I think the fact we've gone on this far about halflings specifically and the gnome mentions tend towards short shows that halflings were the mistake and gnomes fit into the world better somehow

You don't have to appear vague about it-there's no 'somehow'. Gnomes DO fit. If they don't, then there's a surely a host of creatures of every alignment that don't fit-and that includes certain classes of hero and heroine too. For instance, Monks are the most pointless and tragically loused-up amalgam of Ninjas, Clerics, Rogues and Draconic Sorcerers, with D&D 5E wanting to have it ALL ways with the most stupidest idea for a hero class that just doesn't exist, merely exhibiting features of all these classes. Screw Monks, screw 'em, if they were even worth it, which they're bloody not. Along with Modrons and Troglodytes as enemies, and Hobbits as a race, Monks just don't exist to me.

I always saw Gnomes as the 4th main good-aligned Hero races to play that weren't of the monster/animal humanoid subtype, with Dwarfs, Elves and Humans, so got a real shock to find they actually wasted 3 pages of The Race Chapter about them, and the Gnomes, while present, were relegated to the ridiculous "more Uncommon Races not existing in every D&D world", which surely adds fuel to their defence. What KIND of D&D interpretative round-up ALWAYS features Hobbits yet dismisses Gnomes, who bridge the gap perfectly between Dwarfs and Elves, while also maintaining an equally Elvish link to the Feywild and those sorts of creatures? Mecheon, you're so right about Hobbits being a mistake, not that it's a mistake, I've ever bothered with, just like Monks, which seem even more worthless than Hobbits. In fact, they are. Everything D&D pretends they do are merely already utilised by Ninjas, Clerics, Rogues, Witches, Samurais and Sorcerers. THAT simple.

 

[Gammadoodler]

You don't have to appear vague about it-there's no 'somehow'. Gnomes DO fit. If they don't, then there's a surely a host of creatures of every alignment that don't fit-and that includes certain classes of hero and heroine too. For instance, Monks are the most pointless and tragically loused-up amalgam of Ninjas, Clerics, Rogues and Draconic Sorcerers, with D&D 5E wanting to have it ALL ways with the most stupidest idea for a hero class that just doesn't exist, merely exhibiting features of all these classes. Screw Monks, screw 'em, if they were even worth it, which they're bloody not. Along with Modrons and Troglodytes as enemies, and Hobbits as a race, Monks just don't exist to me.

I always saw Gnomes as the 4th main good-aligned Hero races to play that weren't of the monster/animal humanoid subtype, with Dwarfs, Elves and Humans, so got a real shock to find they actually wasted 3 pages of The Race Chapter about them, and the Gnomes, while present, were relegated to the ridiculous "more Uncommon Races not existing in every D&D world", which surely adds fuel to their defence. What KIND of D&D interpretative round-up ALWAYS features Hobbits yet dismisses Gnomes, who bridge the gap perfectly between Dwarfs and Elves, while also maintaining an equally Elvish link to the Feywild and those sorts of creatures? Mecheon, you're so right about Hobbits being a mistake, not that it's a mistake, I've ever bothered with, just like Monks, which seem even more worthless than Hobbits. In fact, they are. Everything D&D pretends they do are merely already utilised by Ninjas, Clerics, Rogues, Witches, Samurais and Sorcerers. THAT simple.

I enjoyed this rant.

I enjoyed the parts where we compare monks to 6 different...classes.. I guess... where 2 of the comparisons are not even a thing in 5e (witches and ninjas), 1 of them is not in the PHB (samurai), and 1 is a specific subclass in the PHB (draconic sorcerer)...leaving 2 actual PHB classes remaining (rogues and clerics).

I enjoyed the part where of those 2 remaining classes 1 of them has next to zero in common with monks. Clerics are armored primary spellcasters. Monks are melee skirmisher martials. I mean there's so little overlap, they don't even share letters in their class names. The only things these two classes have in common are: they care about wisdom...and they roll a d20 for attacks and saving throws.

But sure there is rogue overlap.

I mean there are good reasons to complain about how monks fit. Surprising to see a rant like this land on...none of them.

 

[turnip_farmer]

You don't have to appear vague about it-there's no 'somehow'. Gnomes DO fit. If they don't, then there's a surely a host of creatures of every alignment that don't fit-and that includes certain classes of hero and heroine too. For instance, Monks are the most pointless and tragically loused-up amalgam of Ninjas, Clerics, Rogues and Draconic Sorcerers, with D&D 5E wanting to have it ALL ways with the most stupidest idea for a hero class that just doesn't exist, merely exhibiting features of all these classes. Screw Monks, screw 'em, if they were even worth it, which they're bloody not. Along with Modrons and Troglodytes as enemies, and Hobbits as a race, Monks just don't exist to me.

I always saw Gnomes as the 4th main good-aligned Hero races to play that weren't of the monster/animal humanoid subtype, with Dwarfs, Elves and Humans, so got a real shock to find they actually wasted 3 pages of The Race Chapter about them, and the Gnomes, while present, were relegated to the ridiculous "more Uncommon Races not existing in every D&D world", which surely adds fuel to their defence. What KIND of D&D interpretative round-up ALWAYS features Hobbits yet dismisses Gnomes, who bridge the gap perfectly between Dwarfs and Elves, while also maintaining an equally Elvish link to the Feywild and those sorts of creatures? Mecheon, you're so right about Hobbits being a mistake, not that it's a mistake, I've ever bothered with, just like Monks, which seem even more worthless than Hobbits. In fact, they are. Everything D&D pretends they do are merely already utilised by Ninjas, Clerics, Rogues, Witches, Samurais and Sorcerers. THAT simple.

Everybody knows what a DnD monk is. They attend monasteries up in mountains where they live ascetic lives and train constantly under the supervision of some mysterious old dude with a long, thin moustache who says meaningless crap that sounds deep, then they go off into the world and do kung fu.

Anyone who's ever watched television understands what this is trying to be.

Nobody knows what the hell a gnome is. Your going to lie to yourself and pretend that gnome is a well-understood archetype that we all agree on because you're steeped in decades of DND culture, but the basic races and classes should be those I can explain in detail to someone who knows nothing about DnD or its spin-offs by saying something like 'a Hobbit, like in Lord of the Rings'.

I mention gnomes and people think of stupid little guys with red hats in the gardens of people with poor taste. Or we have a big confusing discussion about folklore and the development of fantasy stereotypes because their native language does not distinguish between gnomes and dwarves.

@#&! gnomes.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Nobody knows what the hell a gnome is. Your going to lie to yourself and pretend that gnome is a well-understood archetype that we all agree on because you're steeped in decades of DND culture,

Hence the importance of good write-ups for all races in the PHB. So people don’t hear “halflings” and think “the guys from the Lord of the Rings movies who were comic relief and didn’t contribute meaningfully in combat for most of three movies”, and people don’t hear “gnomes” and think “basically Smurfs”.